I am the Founder of Community of Liberty, a chapter based organization committed to pursuing the art of living in liberty, a member of the Publication Committee of the Claremont Review of Books, an Advisor to TheGold StandardNow.org, and a juror for the Bastiat Prize for Journalism. I have just published with my co-author Ralph Benko the booklet, "The 21st Century Gold Standard: For Prosperity, Security and Liberty," now available as a free download at AGoldenAge.com. I bring to my columns an extensive background in the investment management business, including my experience as an equity portfolio manager, strategist, president of my former firm’s retail sales and marketing subsidiary and member of the parent firm’s management committee. As such, I have been a student and observer of the political/economy and its affects on markets, businesses, and my own business for more than 30 years.

The Audacity of Power: President Obama Vs. The Catholic Church

“Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the Government’s purposes are beneficent.” Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis

In one of the boldest, most audacious moves ever made by a President of the United States, President Barack Obama is on the brink of successfully rendering moot the very first clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” (emphasis added). If he forces the Catholic Church to comply with the Health and Human Services ruling to provide its employees with insurance that covers activities the Church has long held sinful — abortion via the morning after pill, sterilization and contraceptives — then the precedent is clear: when religious beliefs conflict with government decrees, religion must yield.

The story line that President Obama miscalculated in picking this fight with the Catholic Church vastly underestimates the man’s political skill and ambition. His initial approval of the ruling requiring the Church pay for abortion drugs and sterilization was but the first step in a calculated strategy to further his goal of transforming America.

President Obama chose to pick this fight with the Catholic Church by choosing to release the regulations first, and then, as he explained in last Friday’s statement to the press, spend “the next year (before the new regulations take effect) to find an equitable solution that would protect religious liberty and insure that every woman has access to the care that she needs.” The alternative would have been to find the “equitable solution” before announcing the regulations. In other words, this entire political fire storm is a set-up by the Administration.

The original HHS ruling put the Catholic Church into the position of choosing one of these two options:

Option A: The Church complies with the law and violates its own teachings and principles of faith. Such a choice would strip the Church of its legitimacy and make it a de facto vassal of the state. In this case, the ability of the Church to challenge the government’s political power is vastly reduced, if not completely destroyed. Faith, charity and civil society are marginalized. Government wins.

Option B: The Church as a matter of conscience refuses to obey the law, and stops offering health insurance to its employees. In this case, the Church gets crushed by hundreds of millions of dollars in fines. As a consequence, its ability to fulfill its religious mission by funding hospitals, schools and charities is sharply reduced if not destroyed. As the Church is forced to withdraw from its active role in civil society, those who believe in government will rush to fill the void. Faith, charity and civil society are marginalized. Government wins.

The risk to President Obama was the Church would create “Option C” and engage in a broad political battle to force the full repeal of the ruling or, if that fails, the defeat of President Obama in the November election followed by the repeal of ObamaCare. Under Option C, government’s power is reduced. Faith, charity and civil society win.

President Obama’s political skill is demonstrated by his anticipation and preparation for just this outcome. First, he has used the issue to energize his political base by positioning his Administration as the defender of “women’s health” and attacking his opponents for taking him up on his implicit dare to make it an issue in the Presidential campaign.

Second, last Friday’s decision to “retreat,” as proclaimed by the weekend Wall Street Journal’s page 1 headline and find a way to “accommodate” religious freedom, was pure subterfuge. The notion of retreat or compromise is pure spin. The President’s operative statement reflected zero tolerance for those that would disagree with his policies.

He announced: (the imperial) “we’ve reached a decision on how to move forward. Under the rule, women will still have access to free preventive care that includes contraceptive services -– no matter where they work. So that core principle remains (emphasis added). But if a woman’s employer is a charity or a hospital that has a religious objection to providing contraceptive services as part of their health plan, the insurance company -– not the hospital, not the charity -– will be required to reach out and offer the woman contraceptive care free of charge, without co-pays and without hassles.

Got that? The insurance company will be required to offer the service, but will be forbidden from explicitly billing the Catholic organization for providing this benefit. Such a construct is a fraud. Of course the employer will have to pay for these benefits. And, even if they didn’t, the Church is still being forced to support what it believes are sinful acts. This “equitable solution” is simply an attempt to soften the blow of forcing the Catholic Church to accommodate the dictates of the now supreme federal government. It’s a face saving version of Option A.

Post Your Comment

Post Your Reply

Forbes writers have the ability to call out member comments they find particularly interesting. Called-out comments are highlighted across the Forbes network. You'll be notified if your comment is called out.

Comments

The compromise position mentioned last Friday by Obama is nothing but a shell game. I understand under the compromise, private insurance carriers will be required to foot the bill for contraception, sterilization and abortion as mandated under ObamaCare. Insurance organizations are not a charity. The bill will be passed on to consumers like me who pays the premium. What do you think will happen? Yes the Bishops will not pay a dime, but I WILL be the one paying!!!..through the premiums that I pay (which I anticipate will necessarily increase because of this unlawful mandate). I am a man of faith and my conscience is against me contributing to the murder and killing of the unborn. Do you understand the moral torpitude that Obama and ObamaCare is causing people like me?

Mr. Knapp, both of your numbered “key facts” are wrong, as is your final screed.

1) Even without a religious exemption, religious employers can already avoid the contraceptive mandates in those 28 states by self-insuring their prescription drug coverage, dropping that coverage altogether, or opting for regulation under a federal law (ERISA) that pre-empts state law. The HHS mandate closes off all these avenues of relief.

2) The Catholic Health Association has since posted a statement that they are still reviewing the proposed “compromise” and their statement implies that they are aware that nothing about the rule has been changed and all we have to go on are vague promises by the President that will not come due until after his re-election. http://chausa.org/Pages/About_CHA/Presidents_Page/HHS_Mandate/

In any event, the Catholic Health Association does NOT run the hospitals. The CHA is a voluntary trade association that engages in advocacy, education and other activities in service of the Catholic healthcare industry and its members. And the bishops are not the only ones with religious freedom. All individuals, including Catholic insurers and hospitals are entitled to First Amendment protection.

Mr Knapp: You misunderstand several things about Catholicism. First, the CHA is not an “arm” of the Church, it’s independent. The CHA doesn’t speak for the Church, only the bishops do. And the Bishops speak for Christ, not for what particular members of the church at particular times in particular countries do. The Church is universal. She has taught that contraception, sterilization, and abortion are wrong for 2000 years. The fact that some “Catholic” organizations and people have compromised those teachings does NOT mean that the United States government has the right to force all of them to compromise those teachings. And if you believe that insurance companies are going to give away medicine and services without charging anyone for them, you’ve got another thing coming. Finally, it’s not 28 states, and there are broad exemptions in all but three of those states. You don’t base federal law on the worst of state laws.

The Catholic Health Association you quote is a rogue far left liberal faction that is under investigation by the Church. Second, Sister Carol Keehan is a well compenstated mouth piece for Obama. She earns over 900k a year to be the mouth piece for this Administration. So, we know what her 30 pieces of silver is worth in today’s monetary terms. Also, the “arms” of the Church that run the hospitals, has sold it’s soul, too, to be at the teat of the Federal Governments medical stream. And lastly, just because 23 other States choose to mandate this practice, does not make it right. Contriception can be obtained for as little as 35.00 a day, why should I or anyone else’s tax dollars pay for their chooses in life? This is not about contraceptives, this is about a President that thinks he is above the law and thinks because of pass “sins” of this country, we have to pay now. This nation is not perfect, but show me a nation that is. This nation has prospered due to it’s freedoms and now, we all see what is happening when those freedoms are taken away-everyone is suffering, not just the “rich”.

What you fail to recognize regarding CHA is that it’s president and ceo, sr. Carol Keehan ,is an Obama stooge who has been at odds with the bishops before for her enthusiastic support of obamacare, and for her pro-choice sympathies. While her very public statements received much press, the CHA website assures members that it is” reviewing the mandate.” Sr. Keehan might run the hospitals, but she does not speak for anyone but herself, not even for CHA, as regards the catholic position on the Obama/HHS mandate. I think you are missing some critical information regarding “regulations on the books in 28 states” If I have a chance to look into I’ll try to respond to it or maybe someone else could. I’m curious about it myself.

not true….sister Keenan’s email must have been full last weekend because although she’s still insisting we need to keep quiet about it and try to compromise, she now says she backs the bishops and will bring it up at the next meeting.

I can’t speak for Mr. Knapp, but according to the information that is widely available to everyone who can read, your initial statement requires faith in a ancient book that promotes brutality, mysogyny, rape, murder, slavery, bigotry, and a suspension in the employment of reality and logic. How can anything you say following that statement be taken seriously?

Actually at lest in NY state the NY state Catholic Conference sued and lost to have the contraception mandate removed. Compliance is formally under protest. Also the federal mandate goes beyond most states and certainly NY state’s by covering items such as ella that actually prevent implantation which is in effect an abortifacient pace those that say anything before implantation is contraception. The Catholic Health Association does not speak for catholics they are not the magisterium. Sr. Keehan may think she speaks ofr all hospitals but she is only head of an association – the bishops are the pastors and have the duty to speak on behalf of the people. The President has no right to negotiate uniquely with her. Also what about Catholic Charities USA which has backed off on their initial enthusiasm and all the other institutions and PRIVATE individual employers for whom CHA has no standing at all. The People of God have given those institutions life no Obama lackey has the right to negotiate those freedoms away.